The Drinking Water search captures data on public drinking water systems regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The results displayed for each of the systems returned reflect data drawn from the federal version of the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/Fed).

Please note that drinking water data displayed on ECHO are not real-time data. Violation and enforcement data are reported quarterly to the data system of record no later than the quarter following the quarter in which the events occur. Water systems, states and EPA use this additional quarter to verify that the data they are reporting are accurate and complete. Some states have more recent data available on their websites. Questions about current drinking water quality in your community can be answered by your local public water system.

Under SDWA, all territories, most states, and the Navajo Nation have been approved for "primacy," meaning the authority to implement and enforce SDWA within their jurisdictions. They have shown that their standards are at least as stringent as the national standards and that they can ensure that public water systems meet these standards. Primacy agencies collect detailed system and monitoring data from systems within their jurisdictions, and submit a portion of that data quarterly to EPA. The data required to be reported to EPA include information about each system, such as its name, type (community, transient, non-transient), population served, and source water type; violations of SDWA regulations; and enforcement actions taken to return the system to compliance.

Some compliance information is submitted by public water systems to their primacy agencies, who submit the data to EPA. Primacy agencies often have more detail in their data systems than are reported to EPA. For example, in some cases, primacy agencies may report to EPA that a maximum contaminant level was exceeded, but not the actual level of contaminant measured in the drinking water. For more comprehensive data or measured values, please contact your state drinking water program.

Territories

Data Currency, Quality, Availability

Why did EPA make this drinking water data available?

One of EPA's enforcement goals is to improve transparency by making facility compliance information available and accessible to the public. Drinking water data has been posted to EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) tool in May 2011 in a user-friendly format along with explanations of all terms and data elements. EPA will continue to improve this tool based on user feedback. EPA also expects that improved data completeness, accuracy and timeliness will result from increased public access to the data and ongoing data system modernization.

What is SDWIS and what information does it include?

SDWIS stands for the Safe Drinking Water Information System and contains information submitted by public water systems to primacy agencies, and by primacy agencies, to meet the reporting requirements established by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and related regulations and guidance. SDWA requires primacy agencies to report drinking water information periodically to EPA; this information is maintained in the federal database, SDWIS/FED.

What is a primacy agency under the Safe Drinking Water Act and what are the data reporting requirements?

A primacy agency is the agency with primary responsibility for implementing the Safe Drinking Water Act. Most states and the U.S. territories have been approved to exercise primary responsibility in their jurisdictions. Exceptions are the state of Wyoming and the District of Columbia, which are implemented by EPA. The Navajo Nation has been approved for primary responsibility for implementing SDWA on their lands, but EPA implements SDWA on all other tribal lands.

Primacy agencies are required to report the following information to EPA:

Basic information on each water system, including: name, ID number, city county, and number of people served, type of system (residential, transient, non-transient), whether they operate year-round or seasonally, and characteristics of their sources of water.

Violation information for each water system: whether it has followed established monitoring and reporting schedules, complied with mandated treatment techniques, violated any Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), or communicated vital information to their customers.

Enforcement information: the actions primacy agencies have taken to ensure that drinking water systems return to compliance, if they are in violation of a drinking water regulation.

Sampling results: the unregulated contaminants and for regulated contaminants when the monitoring results exceed the MCL.

How does EPA use SDWA data?

EPA uses this information to track non-compliant systems, oversee state drinking water programs, track contaminant levels, respond to public inquiries, and prepare national reports for the public and Congress. EPA also uses this information to evaluate the effectiveness of its programs and regulations and to determine whether new regulations are needed to further protect public health.

What is ECHO?

ECHO stands for Enforcement and Compliance History Online and provides integrated compliance and enforcement information for more than 800,000 regulated facilities nationwide. The site allows users to find inspection, violation, enforcement action, informal enforcement action, and penalty information about regulated entities for the past three to five years. Entities regulated under the following environmental statutes are included: Clean Air Act (Stationary Source Program), Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Elimination Discharge System), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (hazardous waste program), and the Safe Drinking Water Act (public water systems).

ECHO reports provide a snapshot of a regulated entity's environmental record, showing dates and types of violations, as well as the state or federal government's response. ECHO reports also contain demographic information from the U.S. Census. EPA, state, territorial and local environmental agencies and regulated facilities collect/report the data that are submitted to EPA databases.

How current is the Safe Drinking Water Act data released in ECHO?

Data from each calendar quarter becomes available in the Safe Drinking Water Information System after the end of the following quarter. Water systems, states, and EPA use this additional three-month verification period to check the reported data for accuracy and completeness. The data becomes available for public review in ECHO (Enforcement and Compliance History Online) during the month after the verification period. For example, data about enforcement actions taken by September 30 in a given year will become final in SDWIS on December 31, and will become available in ECHO in January or later. The date of the latest SDWIS data available in ECHO is shown in About the Data.

What caveats should I know about the data in the Drinking Water Data Search?

Overall Quality of Data Compliance statistics are based on violations reported by states to the EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). EPA is aware of inaccuracies and underreporting of some data in this system. We are working with the states to improve the quality of the data. Due to the known incompleteness of the data reported by states and regions, we are careful to refer to systems as having reported violations or no reported violations. For more information, see SDWA Data Caveats and SDWIS.

Frequency of Data Updates Reported violations appear in ECHO about 4-5 months after they occur; however, states may maintain their own data systems and may be able to provide more timely information. Data from each calendar quarter becomes available in SDWIS after the end of the following quarter. Water systems, states, and EPA use this additional three-month verification period to check the reported data for accuracy and completeness. The data then becomes available in ECHO during the month after that the verification period. For example, data about enforcement actions taken by September 30 in a given year will become final in SDWIS on December 31, and become available in ECHO in January or later. The date of the latest SDWIS data available in ECHO is shown in the "Current As Of" field of the SDWIS Public Water System Report.

Sample Values Sample contaminant values that trigger Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) or Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) violations are not always available in EPA's database of record (SDWIS/Fed). States collect detailed sampling data from public water systems, and are required to submit a portion of their data to EPA. All violations are required to be reported to EPA, but only a subset of the measured values and units are required to be reported to EPA. To find out more about the available sample data, contact your state drinking water program or local water system.

SDWA 101

What is a public water system?

A public water system (PWS) is a system that provides water for human consumption and has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 individuals at least 60 days out of the year. EPA does not have the authority to regulate private drinking water wells that do not meet the above criteria.

Public water systems can be categorized by type:

Community - A water system that serves the same population throughout the year. Eighty-two percent (82%) of these systems are small.

Non-Transient/Non-Community - A public water system that regularly supplies water to at least 25 of the same people at least six months per year, but not year-round. Some examples are schools, factories, office buildings, and hospitals which have their own water systems. Ninety-nine percent (99%) of these systems are small.

Transient/Non-Community - A public water system that provides water in a place such as a gas station or campground where people do not remain for a long period of time. Almost one hundred percent (99.9%) of these systems are small.

What are the various types of SDWA violations shown in ECHO?

Violations required to be reported under SDWA are grouped into the following categories:

Health-Based - These violations fall into three categories: 1) exceedances of the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) which specify the highest allowable contaminant concentrations in drinking water, 2) exceedances of the maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs), which specify the highest concentrations of disinfectants allowed in drinking water, and 3) treatment technique requirements, which specify certain processes intended to reduce the level of a contaminant.

Monitoring and Reporting - Failure to conduct regular monitoring of drinking water quality, or to submit monitoring results in a timely fashion to the state primacy agency or EPA, as required by SDWA.

Public Notice - Violations of the public notification requirements, which require systems to alert consumers if there is a serious problem with their drinking water or if there have been other violations of system requirements, as required by SDWA.

Other - Violations of other requirements of SDWA, such as failing to issue annual consumer confidence reports.

Why is there incomplete information on Maximum Contaminant Levels and contaminant measured values in the drinking water data in ECHO?

States collect detailed sampling data from public water systems, and submit a portion of their data to EPA. All violations are required to be reported to EPA, but only a subset of the measured values and units is required to be reported to EPA. To find out more about the available sample data, contact your state drinking water program or call your water system. As part of EPA's Drinking Water Strategy, EPA is working with states to share compliance monitoring data; this will result in more data being made available to the public. This project is scheduled for completion in 2014.

What is the Consumer Confidence Report (CCR)?

The Consumer Confidence Report, or CCR, is an annual water quality report that a community water system is required to provide to its customers. The CCR helps people make informed choices about the water they drink. It lets people know what contaminants, if any, are in their drinking water and how these contaminants may affect their health. Every community water system is required by law to provide its customers with a Consumer Confidence Report by July 1st of each year. This report lists the regulated contaminants the community water system detected in treated water and the level at which they were found for the preceding calendar year.

[A community water system is a public water system that serves at least fifteen service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents (e.g., homes, apartments and condominiums that are occupied year-round as primary residences).]

ECHO shows that my public water system has a number of unresolved violations or is identified as a serious violator. Is my water safe to drink?

Water suppliers must promptly inform you if your water has become contaminated by something that can cause immediate illness. Water suppliers have 24 hours to inform their customers of violations of EPA standards "that have the potential to have serious adverse effects on human health as a result of short-term exposure." If such a violation occurs, the water system will announce it through the media and must provide information about the potential adverse effects on human health, the steps the system is taking to correct the violation, and the need to use alternative water supplies (such as boiled or bottled water) until the problem is corrected. Systems will inform customers about violations of less immediate concern in the first water bill sent after the violation, in a Consumer Confidence Report, or by mail within a year.

As described in the answer to question about caveats, due to the length of time needed for primacy agencies to enter their data into the data system and the length of time needed to initiate an informal or formal enforcement action for the violation, a system's violation may not appear in the database to be resolved for several quarters after the violation occurs. The data delay also means it is possible that the violations have been corrected or addressed since the last update. To get the most up-to-date information about your public water system, contact your state drinking water program or call your water system.

Enforcement and SDWA Enforcement Response Policy

How do primacy agencies respond to noncompliance?

When a drinking water violation is identified and a system does not resolve the violation on its own, or compliance assistance or other non-enforcement actions such as those listed above do not return the violating system to compliance, EPA guidelines direct the primacy agency to initiate an enforcement response. Acceptable enforcement responses are defined in part by the Safe Drinking Water Act and in part by EPA guidance. Acceptable actions include a variety of escalating informal and formal actions as the state or EPA attempts to return a violating public water system to compliance as quickly as possible.

Generally, the primacy agency's first responses to violations are informal actions such as reminder letters, warning letters, notices of violation, field visits, and telephone calls. In 2009, primacy agencies initiated 169,015 informal actions.

If a violation continues or recurs, the primacy agency must initiate a formal enforcement response that requires the violating public water system to return to compliance on an enforceable schedule. Formal enforcement responses include citations, administrative orders with or without penalties, civil referrals to state attorneys general or to the U.S. Department of Justice, filing criminal charges, and other sanctions.

If there is risk to public health, EPA and the primacy agency can issue emergency orders that require the public water system to take immediate action to protect public health and return the system to compliance.

What does "serious violator" mean?

Because certain violations or combinations of violations result in a system being identified as most in need of a response action by the primacy agency, EPA has developed a system that assigns either one, five, or ten points to each violation as a reflection of the violation's severity. Systems called "serious violators" are an aggregate score of at least eleven points as a result of some combination of: unresolved more serious violations (such as MCL violations related to acute contaminants), multiple violations (health-based, monitoring and reporting, public notification and/or other violations), and/or continuing violations. For these purposes, "continuing" means the violation not been reported either as corrected or as addressed by a formal enforcement action.

Why does EPA's ECHO website label facilities as "serious violators" when the Enforcement Response Policy (ERP) does not discuss that term?

EPA considered using the term "priority system" in the ECHO website as is used in the Enforcement Response Policy, but decided against it for several reasons. The term "priority" in the ERP means that a system is a priority for response action from the primacy agency because of the number and types of violations and the length of time those violations have been unresolved. EPA was concerned, however, that the term "priority" might be misconstrued to mean that a system is a priority for other reasons. EPA chose to use the term "serious violator" instead, to better convey that the designation is a result of the violations at the system. The term is similar to other terms already used in ECHO for other programs (e.g., significant noncompliance and high priority violator), yet it is slightly different, which allows users to distinguish that the reference is to the Safe Drinking Water Act.

How do primacy agencies respond when a system becomes a "serious violator?"

EPA expects that the drinking water system and the primacy agency will act quickly to resolve these violations. A public water system with serious, multiple, and/or continuing violations, as identified on the quarterly list of serious violators, is expected to either return to compliance or be addressed by a formal enforcement action within six months.

When a system on the list has returned to compliance, or the primacy agency has taken a formal enforcement action to address the violations and entered the data completely, those violations are no longer considered "unresolved," and the system will no longer appear on the list of serious violators.

What percent of systems are currently identified as "serious violators," as defined in the SDWA Enforcement Response Policy?

Since EPA began identifying "serious violators" the percentage of all systems on the list has steadily declined. As of January 2011, about 4% of all public water systems were on this list. The list is updated quarterly, so each quarterly list is a snapshot in time. EPA believes that part of the decrease in the number of serious violators is the result of states and regions entering data in a timelier manner and part is due to primacy agencies more efficiently addressing noncompliance at violating systems.

How can a system that has been non-compliant for 3 years not be on the list of systems identified as serious violators?

Not all violations are serious enough to place a system on the serious violators list. A system can incur a series of very minor violations without being designated a serious violator, but if the system incurs one acute health-based violation, it will appear on the list. It is also possible that a system may have a different violation each quarter but if those violations are returned to compliance quickly, the system may never appear on the list. Also, those facilities may have received enforcement actions addressing those violations, which will remove the systems from the serious violators list.

How many formal enforcement actions did primacy agencies take in 2009?

In 2009, primacy agencies initiated 4,609 formal enforcement actions in response to drinking water violations at public water systems in their jurisdictions. The vast majority of these actions were taken by primacy states. EPA has primacy in Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and in Indian country, except for the Navajo Nation. EPA's actions were primarily in these areas where it has primacy. EPA has also initiated enforcement action on public water systems where the state has primacy, often at a state's request.

My system has been in noncompliance continuously for 3 years. Why has no enforcement action been taken by EPA or my state?

While EPA has oversight responsibility, front line enforcement responsibility resides with the states, territories and the Navajo Nation. Exceptions are in Wyoming, the District of Columbia, and all other tribal lands, where EPA has front line enforcement responsibility. The primacy agency identifies and addresses the systems in violation in their jurisdiction so that these systems are returned to compliance. Primacy agencies have various tools available to address noncompliance. Some violations are returned to compliance by the system on their own (e.g. the system takes a missed monitoring sample) or without an enforcement action by the primacy agency. In such circumstances, the database may not show an enforcement action associated with a violation. In certain circumstances, EPA takes enforcement action when the state cannot and/or when a state requests that EPA do so.

How many systems have had at least one violation in the past 3 years?

As of December 31, 2010, approximately 66,802 systems or about 44% of all active systems (approximately 153,000) were reported to have had at least one violation in the past 3 years.

Why does ECHO show that there are public water systems that have had formal enforcement actions issued, but have not returned to compliance?

A formal enforcement action is an enforceable method used to return a system to compliance. It provides a path to compliance, but does not automatically bring the system back into compliance. Once a system returns to compliance (e.g., has installed appropriate treatment), the responsible enforcement agency (state or EPA) will record that fact in SDWIS as a "resolving enforcement action," and the system will be shown as having returned to compliance.

How can I use ECHO to get a list of all systems in compliance?

ECHO can display a list of all public water systems that had "no open violations" recorded in the database in the last quarter. This can be accomplished by checking the "No Violations" box in the Compliance Information section of the Drinking Water Facility Search form.

However, EPA is aware of underreporting of violations and returns to compliance into SDWIS. EPA cautions users that a list of systems with no violations in ECHO represents the best data we have available, but may not be a true representation of current compliance.

States' Role

What is the state's role in ensuring compliance with SDWA Public Water System Supervision requirements?

Currently, all states and territories have been delegated authority for the Primacy Enforcement Responsibility (Primacy) for the Public Water System Supervision Program (PWSS), with the exception of Wyoming and the District of Columbia (neither of which has sought delegation). The Navajo Nation is the only Indian tribe to have sought and received Primacy for the PWSS program.

Eligible states, territories, and tribes develop and implement a PWSS program adequate to enforce the requirements of the SDWA and ensure that water systems comply with the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. EPA works with these primacy agencies to ensure that they carry out key activities essential to PWSS program. Key activities carried out under a PWSS program include:

developing and maintaining state drinking water regulations,

developing and maintaining an inventory of public water systems throughout the state,

developing and maintaining a database to hold compliance information on public water systems,

conducting sanitary surveys of public water systems,

reviewing public water system plans and specifications,

providing technical assistance to managers and operators of public water systems,

carrying out a program to ensure that the public water systems regularly inform their consumers about the quality of the water that they are providing,

certifying laboratories that can perform the analysis of drinking water that will be used to determine compliance with the regulations, and

carrying out an enforcement program to ensure that the public water systems comply with all of the state's requirements.

Each of these activities is necessary to implement the PWSS program and enforce the drinking water standards. While the primacy agencies provide EPA with information on drinking water systems in the national database and in reports, EPA and the primacy agencies also hold regular discussions on the compliance status of systems. EPA retains enforcement authority in primacy states.

How do EPA and the states work together to ensure compliance?

EPA and states work together on a continuous, ongoing basis to build capacity among public water systems by providing them with compliance, managerial, financial and technical assistance. EPA encourages states to provide assistance and informal responses to systems before their violations rise to a level requiring formal enforcement. EPA identifies, on a quarterly basis, the systems with the most unresolved serious multiple and/or ongoing violations. EPA then works with the states to prioritize those systems for quickly returning them to compliance. Many of the problems EPA identifies occur at small systems because they often lack resources and the capacity to quickly fix problems that lead to violations. The dialogue between EPA and states is necessarily ongoing as some of these systems remain on the serious violator list for extended periods while they work to return to compliance, such as when new treatment technology must be installed or while qualified personnel are recruited and hired.

Compliance in Indian Country

The data in EPA's 2009 PWS Report shows that drinking water systems in Indian country are about twice as likely as systems outside of Indian country to have a significant violation during the course of a year. Why is that?

Consumers in Indian country are more likely to be served by small systems than are consumers outside of Indian country. Small systems tend to share characteristics that can make compliance more challenging. The disparity is often the result of differences in financial, administrative, and technical capacity between large and small systems. For example, small systems have fewer users from whom to collect the funds to purchase and install needed infrastructure and to operate and maintain the system. However, EPA believes that noncompliance at any system, irrespective of size, is an issue that should be addressed as expeditiously as possible. EPA's goal is to ensure that all citizens, including those in Indian country, are provided safe drinking water. The SDWA PWSS Enforcement Response Policy reiterates that formal enforcement action should be taken when assistance or informal enforcement action does not effectively return a system to compliance in a timely manner, regardless of the size, type, owner, operator or location of the system.

Territories

Several of the U.S. territories appear to have higher than average percentages of their universes on the serious violators report. Why is that?

One reason is that the territories are small and tend to have few systems. Therefore, a small number of systems on the serious violators report will appear to be a greater percentage of their total number of systems. It is important to know the total number of systems to understand the significance of the percentage.

The second reason is that public water systems in the territories tend to be small and to have many fewer resources than average with which to operate and maintain their systems. See response to question #26 above for more discussion on the challenges facing small systems.

Data Caveats

Reporting Lag for Violation Data

Data about violations in each calendar quarter becomes available in SDWIS after the end of the following quarter. Water systems, states, and EPA use this additional three-month verification period to check the reported violation data for accuracy and completeness. The data then become available in ECHO some time after that. For example, data about violations entered by September 30 in a given year will become final in SDWIS on December 31, and become available in ECHO in January or later. The date of the latest SDWIS data available in ECHO is shown on the About the Data page, and in the "Current As Of" field of the SDWIS Public Water System Report. Some states have more recent data available directly on their websites, via the More State Data Searches page.

Sample Values

Sample contaminant values that trigger MCL or MRDL violations are not always available in ECHO. States collect detailed sampling data from public water systems, and submit a portion of their data to EPA. All violations are required to be reported to EPA, but the measured values and units are not always required to be reported to EPA and so are not always available in ECHO. To find out more about the available sample data, you can visit the More State Data Searches page, or contact your state drinking water program.

Missing or Incorrect Data in ECHO

As of the July 2011 SDWIS refresh, ECHO is known to report missing or incorrect data in the following cases.

Violation Rule Names

The rule names are missing for some violations. The missing rule names are caused by incorrect data in SDWIS.

Known Data Problems

The Drinking Water section of the Known Data Problems page has additional information about known data quality problems in SDWIS.